Report to WASC

University of Hawai‘i at HiloSpecial VisitMarch 18-20, 2008

Submitted byApril Komenaka Scazzolakomenaka@hawaii.eduAccreditation Liaison OfficerJanuary 15, 2008

Table of Contents

1. Institutional Context and Major Changes since Last Visit 1Institutional Context 1Major Changes since March 2004 Site Visit 1

Academic Programs 1Personnel 2Facilities 2

2. Report Preparation and Campus Review 4

3. Response to Issues Identified by the Commission in the 2004 Action Letter 5

Institutional Resources and Planning 5Budget Processes 5Strategic Planning 6Extramural Funding and Private Donations 8

Faculty Governance 10Diversity 12

Improving Faculty Diversity 12Integrating the Indigenous Culture and Ways of Knowing

throughout the Curriculum 14Educational Effectiveness: Assessment of Student Learning 15

4. Other Issues Raised by the March 2004 Site Team 17General Education Program 17Retention and Persistence to Graduation 19Program Review 22Strategic Plan Performance Indicators 23

5. The Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization 24

6. The College of Pharmacy 25

7. Other Issues Facing the Institution 27Graduate Council and Graduate Programs 27Management of Documents 29

8. Preparing for the Next Cycle of Review 30

9. Conclusion 31How Have Our Responses to WASC’s Challenges Impacted

the Institution? 31Major Recommendations 32

Appendix A. Required Attachments In Text and on CD

Appendix B. Other Supporting Materials On CD

ii

1. Institutional Context and Major Changes since Last Visit

Context. The University of Hawai‘i at Hilo is a comprehensive regional university located on the island of Hawai‘i, the southernmost and largest island in the Hawaiian archipelago. UH Hilo is part of the University of Hawaii’s ten-campus system of public higher education and is the only accredited, four-year educational institution on the island. Formerly named Hilo College, the university began offering the baccalaureate degree in 1970 and was first accredited by WASC in 1976.

The primary mission of UH Hilo is to offer high quality undergraduate liberal arts and professional programs. In addition to 32 baccalaureate programs, UH Hilo now offers master’s programs in five fields, a doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization, and the doctoral degree in Pharmacy. The university provides students with opportunities in hands-on learning, leadership, and community service, and encourages close student-faculty interaction, including student-faculty collaboration on research projects.

The university is comprised of five degree-granting colleges and one outreach college:

the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) the College of Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resource Management (CAFNRM) Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke‘elikōlani College of Hawaiian Language (CHL) the College of Business and Economics (CoBE) the College of Pharmacy (CoP) the College of Continuing Education and Community Service (CCECS)

In Fall 2007, UH Hilo had 3,071 FTE students and a headcount of 3,573. Of these, 196 were graduate students (headcount), including students admitted to the College of Pharmacy. Total FTE faculty numbered 242.5, with full-time faculty headcount at 211 and part-time faculty at 83. (Attachment A.2, Required Data Displays)

Upon completion of the educational effectiveness review in Spring 2004, WASC reaffirmed the accreditation of the university and scheduled the next review to begin with a proposal in 2010, the Preparatory Review for 2013, and the Educational Effectiveness Review for 2014.

Major Changes since March 2004 Site Visit. The past four years have seen many changes in degree programs, administration, and physical facilities.

Academic programs. Since the last WASC visit in March 2004, when the MA in Hawaiian Language and Literature and the MEd were being offered, three more master’s degree programs have admitted students: China-US Relations, Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Science (both in Fall 2004), and Counseling Psychology (Fall 2005).

1

The PhD program in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization admitted its first students in Fall 2006. (Section 5 describes the progress of this doctorate program since approval of the substantive change proposal in June 2006.) The College of Pharmacy admitted the first students to its Doctor of Pharmacy program in Fall 2007. (Section 6 of this report describes the advances made by the College of Pharmacy since approval of the substantive change proposal in June 2007.) A well developed pre-pharmacy program has been established in the College of Arts and Sciences.

The new BA in Environmental Studies and BS in Environmental Science were first offered in Fall 2007. The BS in Marine Science and the BBA in Accounting have just been approved by the Board of Regents and will be offered beginning Fall 2008.

Personnel. For the first time in many years, all major administrative positions are now held by permanent incumbents. In August 2007, a permanent vice chancellor for administrative affairs and a permanent vice chancellor for academic affairs joined the university; they filled positions held by interim appointments since Spring 2004 and January 2005 respectively. A new vice chancellor for student affairs joined the university in January 2008, immediately following the retirement of her predecessor. Permanent deans are now in place at the College of Agriculture, Forestry, and Natural Resource Management, the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Pharmacy, and the College of Business and Economics.

Between Fall 2004 and Fall 2007, the university succeeded in increasing staff in all categories except part-time instructional staff:

The number of instructional staff positions overall increased from 302 to 345, or 14.23%, with compensated instructional faculty increasing in number from 267 to 294 (10.11%).

While the number of full-time faculty increased from 174 to 211 (+21.26%), the number of part-time instructional staff declined from 93 to 83 (-10.75%).

The number of administrative, professional, and technical staff positions increased from 96 to 111, or 15.65%.

Civil service support positions increased in number from 119 to 141 (+18.48%).

Executive/managerial positions went from 15 to 18 (+16.6%). Non-instructional faculty positions in the Mookini Library and Office of

Student Affairs increased in number from 17 to 33 (+94.1%).

Facilities. The university is in the midst of major expansion in physical facilities. The facilities webpage lists all ongoing projects with regular updates on their status.1 The university is presently revising its Long Range Development Plan; expected date of completion is June 2008.

The new facility most visible and accessible to the public is the Hawai‘i ‘Imiloa Astronomy Center of Hawai‘i, situated in the University Park adjacent to the 1 The facilities webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/planning/

2

UH Hilo campus.2 Dedicated in February 2006, this $28 million state-of-the-art facility was constructed primarily through NASA funding and is supported fiscally by the Hawai‘i state legislature, admission receipts, and membership fees. Faculty from UH Hilo’s Department of Physics and Astronomy and Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke‘elikōlani (the College of Hawaiian Language) have made significant contributions to ‘Imiloa’s distinctive programming and its intellectual vitality. A member of UH Hilo’s astronomy faculty serves as‘Imiloa’s astronomer in residence. ‘Imiloa embodies the university’s commitment to support research, to make scientific knowledge accessible to the community, and to “weave Native Hawaiian and broader Pacific Islander culture and perspectives into science and engineering research and education in Hawai‘i.”

Two other new facilities serving both our academic and the larger community have recently opened their doors. One is the Pacific Aquaculture and Coastal Resources Center (PACRC), a $5.5 million research and demonstration facility completed in 2005, the product of UH Hilo’s collaboration with federal, state, county and local governments. The Center is located in the Native Hawaiian coastal area of Keaukaha in Hilo and provides facilities for aquaculture and marine science undergraduate programs, graduate and faculty research, and public education. Since June 2006, the North Hawai‘i Education and Research Center in Honoka‘a has been enabling the university to bring educational opportunities to the northern communities of Hawai‘i Island; the second phase of the $2.8 million facility will be completed in early 2008.

Three major facilities projects are scheduled for completion by Spring or Summer 2008.

The $16.5 million Student Life Center is a modern recreation center with an outdoor swimming pool and other athletics and fitness facilities. 

The $3.3 million renovation of the library, begun in Spring 2006 and scheduled for completion in Summer 2008, is being accomplished with relatively little disruption of services to students and other library patrons.

By late 2009, two more buildings are expected to be in use:

The College of Pharmacy Interim Facilities ($6 million), located in the University Park next to Komohana Agriculture Complex, will open in late Fall 2008 or early Spring 2009 and will provide faculty offices, research labs, classrooms, and practice labs.

The $28 million Science and Technology Building will house Physics, Astronomy, and Chemistry faculty offices, classrooms, and laboratories.

UH Hilo is hopeful that two other major facilities will soon be built.

2The ‘Imiloa webpage is at http://www.imiloahawaii.org/

3

Funding has been appropriated by the legislature for a $24 million Student Services Building to be started in Summer 2008. Its planned location is adjacent to the existing building that houses the Office of Student Affairs.

A building to house the College of Hawaiian Language is in the preliminary design stage. Construction funds for the building are included in the current supplemental budget request recommended by the governor but not yet approved by the state legislature.

2. Report Preparation and Campus Review

The Accreditation Steering Committee, comprised of the accreditation liaison officer, the assistant vice chancellor for academic affairs, the institutional researcher, and representatives from the Faculty Congress and from the Office of Student Affairs, has been responsible for preparing the special visit report and for making arrangements for the special visit itself. The assistant to the chancellor helped edit and polish the final draft of the report.

This progress report is an edited compilation of materials submitted by such principals as the vice chancellor for administrative affairs, deans and directors of the colleges, the chair of the Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the Faculty and Staff, the chair of the Research and Graduate Council, the chairs of the Faculty Congress and key congress committees, the director of the Hilo office of the Research Corporation of the University of Hawai‘i, and the university’s development officer. The institutional researcher has provided all data. Interviews with a number of administrators, staff, and faculty have provided additional information.

Complete drafts of the report have been reviewed by the contributors and administration. While it was still in draft form, the report was made available to the entire campus community on the university’s accreditation webpage and comments and corrections were invited.

In addition to the copies sent to the Commission and to site team members, hard copies of the report are going to the president of the University of Hawai‘i system, the chair of the system Board of Regents, UH Hilo administrators, university governance leaders, college offices, and to the university library. The report and supporting materials are posted on the university’s accreditation website at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/accreditation .

3. Response to Issues Identified by the Commission in the 2004 Action Letter

Institutional Resources and Planning

4

The Commission observed in its action letter that “the UH system approach to budgeting does not lend itself to institutional development related to enrollment or program expansion. It funds institutions in ways that support neither program expansion nor enrollment growth.” (Attachment B.1) The Commission encouraged “the University and the System to consider ways in which to expand the University’s funding base, and the Board of Regents is encouraged to support that expansion.”

UH Hilo itself, the Commission urged, “should strive more systematically to understand the impact of expanding enrollment on the overall University infrastructure, student services, and staff workload” and “continue its efforts to attract external funding.”

Budget Processes. Since June of 2004, the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo has made improvements to the budget process at the campus level. (The FY 2008 budget is in Attachment A.3.) The process includes tying the budget requests to strategic plan objectives. UH Hilo, due to tight budget allocations from the system, has consistently made efficient use of existing funds and has prioritized its initiatives so that funding is allocated to the most pressing needs that are central to its core mission.

The UH Hilo Long Range Budget Development Committee was recently created. The committee’s goal is to provide:

broad input to the chancellor and Chancellor’s Cabinet regarding budget criteria

strategies for obtaining additional university budget resources long range strategic planning for budget suggestions for methods of budget communication.

The committee will also assist the vice chancellor for administrative affairs to achieve transparency in budgeting by helping her to communicate user-friendly information on UH Hilo’s current budget status, the budget process for upcoming years, and other budget information affecting the campus.

It is anticipated that having such a committee, with members from various campus constituencies, will improve college budgeting and planning in a number of ways: budget results will be better communicated; budget processes will be known; and important budget initiatives will be widely discussed and tied to important campus priorities.

At the UH system level, however, the budget process is not yet tied to strategic plan goals nor does it take enrollment growth into account. The university system’s budget is still, by and large, allocated to the campuses based on historical proportions of the budget, despite the relative enrollments of the campuses having changed over time.

In this biennium budget cycle (2007-09), the campuses presented their requests in terms of the system’s four over-arching priorities: increasing educational capital, expanding workforce development, diversifying the economy, and

5

addressing underserved regions and populations. A system “stocktaking” process took place, by which each campus presented their budget needs to the other campuses.

Although UH Hilo presented prioritized requests linked to the four budget criteria, in the end, the allocations were still based on the historical budget proportions already in place. Such historical budgeting provides no incentive for a campus to take on additional programs or new initiatives or expand the student body, because the consequent growth in size and complexity is not supported with resources. This is particularly troublesome since Hawai‘i is already lagging behind the national norm in producing enough four-year graduates.

In general, the UH system does not link student enrollment (Full Time Equivalent Students) and budget allocation. A formalized budget funding formula for the system would greatly improve the budget allocation process, making the process more quantitative, less political, more predictable, and better for planning purposes. Most other states use some version of a formula for allocating to their various campuses.

There has been discussion recently at the system level of possibly linking additional budget incentives to the system strategic plan, specifically with outcome measures. However, this discussion is at a very preliminary stage, and it is UH Hilo’s concern that, without an allocation formula to ensure sufficient basic infrastructure for enrollment, and instead linking outcomes to new budget amounts, the situation could result in campuses that are simply unable to achieve the desired outcomes or to serve the state’s needs for professional workforce development.

Recommendation:

Continue discussions with the UH system regarding the budget process and resources to support enrollment and program growth, which are badly needed for Hawai‘i’s future workforce, human capital, and economic development.

Strategic Planning. As UH Hilo develops, the campus is guided by two planning documents: the campus strategic plan and the UH system’s strategic plan. Both were finalized in fall of 2002. In its action letter of June 2003 to the system and again in its action letter of June 2004 to UH Hilo, the Commission stated that:

The System’s and University’s strategic planning processes will need to be followed up with a set of priorities for development among and within campuses and must be supported by an accompanying financial plan. This will provide the basis for the University to develop realistic planning priorities and objectives.

This has yet to be accomplished at the campus and system levels. The office of the system vice president for academic planning and policy has embarked on a process called the “Second Decade Project,” which seems to supplement the

6

strategic plans. According to the office’s website, the Second Decade Project is “a two to three year undertaking,” which “seeks to identify the state’s higher education needs in the next decade, determine which of those needs should be met by which campuses, and to develop a set of priorities that will enable the University to plan for the next decade (2020).” 3

The project has produced a document entitled “Serving the State of Hawai‘i Second Decade” (February 2007), consisting of a series of Powerpoint slides assessing the relative need for postsecondary education of ten different regions within the state. (Attachment A.3) The UH Hilo faculty and local community had little opportunity for input into this document. The assumptions, methods, and data used to decide where in the state growth in higher education is most needed have been questioned by the UH Hilo institutional researcher and others on campus.

UH Hilo has planned for years to grow in order to increase the number of four-year graduates in the state and help build a solid professional workforce for Hawai‘i. The university serves the entire state of Hawai‘i, not just East Hawai‘i Island. UH Hilo is an important gateway institution for people who are the first in their family to attend college, those that hold down fulltime jobs or are raising children, members of under-served minority groups, people from rural areas, and others for whom higher education has historically been out of reach. Our plan to grow responds to the needs of the entire state of Hawai‘i.

The system strategic plan is now being updated by the vice president for academic policy and planning, who has developed a document entitled “Serving the State of Hawai‘i: UH System Strategic Outcomes and Performance Measures, 2008–2015.” (Attachment A.3) The system planning office calls this “a companion piece to the plan that assigns strategic priorities and performance measures and extends the plan to 2015.”

UH Hilo has many questions and concerns about this document as well. A major concern is that overall enrollment growth (both FTES and headcount) should be recognized as a prominent strategic priority and tracked as a performance measure, but this document does not include it.

It appears that this document adds to the existing strategic plan and extends its time frame. The vice president for academic policy and planning will come to Hilo mid-January to discuss UH Hilo’s concerns at our request. It is hoped that, during this visit, UH Hilo and the system can arrive at consensus about how best to include the campuses in planning processes as well as substantive planning and budgeting issues.

See section 4 for information about how UH Hilo is measuring its success in meeting the objectives of the campus strategic plan.

Recommendation:

3The webpage for this project is at http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/app/seconddecade/

7

Faculty as well as administration must participate actively in the reshaping of the UH system strategic plan, which includes strategic priorities and performance measures that will affect system allocations to the campus and with which our own strategic planning must be aligned.

Extramural funding and private donations. The 2004 action letter repeated the Commission’s “strong recommendation that the University continue its efforts to attract external funding from donations, grants and contracts.” The university has been successful in attracting external funding. As Figure 1 shows, extramural funding has grown substantially since 2000, when the Hilo office of the Research Corporation of the University of Hawai‘i (RCUH) was established. Since that time, 613 awards totaling $104.4 million have been made to UH Hilo, and 1,714 workers have been hired to staff these projects on Hawai‘i Island. This external funding has created tremendous opportunities for new programs and allowed the expansion of current programs.

Recognizing the extraordinary gains made in science research by the University, the National Science Foundation is funding the temporary position of vice chancellor for research for up to two years. (Attachment B.4) This position is charged with strengthening the university’s scientific research programs, capacity, and competitiveness. The university intends to apply for funding for a permanent vice chancellor for research in the next biennial budget cycle.

Since 2001, UH Hilo’s participation in the NSF’s Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) program has helped the university to increase research funding. EPSCoR has also been instrumental in establishing the M.S. in Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Science, funding faculty and research facilities in genetics, ecology, and cyber infrastructure, and fostering collaboration among faculty and federal and state agencies.

In addition to research grants, the university has benefited from a five-year, $2.5 million National Science Foundation grant designed to increase the number of Native Hawaiian students in the fields of science, technology, and mathematics; and a $4 million NSF Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation grant to 19 Hawai‘i institutions, with UH Hilo as lead institution, aiming to increase the overall number of underrepresented students receiving bachelor degrees in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math. Title III grants totaling $4 million have also been received since 2001 and have been used to increase retention and academic success of Native Hawaiian students and to integrate Native Hawaiian culture into the curriculum.

Figure 1.Extramural Funding at UH Hilo, 2000-2007

8

UH Hilo Awards

3.24.2 4.7

7.89.0

14.6

9.911.2

18.616.716.7

02468

101214161820

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Fiscal Year

Mill

ions

During a visit to UH Hilo in June 2007, the chair of the National Science Board, Dr. Steven C. Beering, praised UH Hilo for “weaving Native Hawaiian and broader Pacific Island culture and perspectives into science and engineering research and education in Hawai‘i.” Dr. Beering stated that “We can learn from the Hawai‘i model for pro-actively broadening participation of under-represented minorities in fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics.”

Private fundraising at UH Hilo has been making steady gains since 1999, with the permanent staffing of the university’s Office of Development. UH Hilo and the UH Foundation (UHF) share the cost of the development office, which will expand to a staff of five by March 2008. Since 2003, private donations have totaled $8.1 million. Operating under the umbrella of the UH System’s Centennial Campaign, UH Hilo has set a campus-specific fundraising goal of $15 million. The primary campus goal of the campaign is to increase the size of UH Hilo’s small endowment—currently $3.25 million—to support the recruitment and retention of faculty and to fund student scholarships.

Recommendations:

Seek to establish the position of vice chancellor for research to support both research proposals and institution improvement grants

Increase funding for faculty research start-up projects, including library resources

9

Continue faculty teaching buy-out programs to improve UH Hilo’s research capability and undergraduate research opportunities

Strengthen the existing faculty mentoring program in order to build strong linkages for research as well as social support

Encourage wider campus and community interest and involvement in the community fundraising mission through the 2007-2008 60th Anniversary Celebration and subsequent development activities

Encourage departments and programs to work with the University of Hawai‘i Foundation to create alumni fund raising campaigns to fund student scholarships and/or targeted scholarly activity

Faculty Governance

For some years, the Commission has been concerned that the university’s two-tiered governance system might “foster redundancy in governance functions.” The Commission asserted in the 2004 action letter that the university must demonstrate, that “it has established and operates with effective governance and administration.” The university administration has chosen to leave faculty free to work toward a governance structure that allows college senates to determine internal curricular and academic policies, while giving the Faculty Congress the responsibility of establishing academic policies that affect all degree-granting colleges.

The university’s faculty Congress includes representatives from all degree-granting colleges, the UH Hilo Student Association, the Library, and the Office of Student Affairs. Chairs of the college senates serve on the Congress; in 2007-2008, the chairs of the CAS and CoBE are on the Congress Executive Committee.

The Congress Charter states its role as “the policy making body of UH Hilo for all academic matters of concern to more than one unit.” (Attachment B.5) The Congress webpage is a graphic and timely representation of the Congress’s operations: displayed there are the charter and by-laws, schedule of meetings, minutes of past meetings, committee membership, committee reports, and links to the webpages of the college senates.4

The Congress interacts frequently with all faculty through the UH Hilo email system and invites faculty to complete online surveys on key issues. It has acted on a number of policies that affect all colleges.

The Congress standardized the UH Hilo student teaching evaluation form in 2007.

A new GE curriculum is being proposed by the General Education Committee.

The Assessment Support Committee is working with all UH Hilo programs to revise statements of student learning outcomes and to develop assessment plans.

4 The Congress webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/congress

10

The Admissions Committee is looking at our admission policy and other student data in an effort to determine how we can improve retention and graduation rates.

There is occasional resistance to the notion that the Congress should make policy on cross-college matters. In November 2007, for example, CAFNRM faculty rejected use of the campus-wide course evaluation system approved in Spring 2007 by the Congress and the vice chancellor for academic affairs; their faculty prefer the form developed and used by the college for many years. Some CAS faculty have asserted that because CAS faculty teach almost all GE courses, the CAS senate—not the Congress—should determine GE requirements. Other faculty have argued that each college—not the Congress—should determine its own GE requirements.

One source of resistance to Congress that occasionally finds expression among faculty of other colleges is the numerical predominance of CAS faculty in the Congress. This appears to be unavoidable, given that Congress representation is linked to college size, and CAS faculty comprise 85% of UH Hilo faculty. Prior to the Educational Effectiveness visit in March 2004, there had been extended discussion about dividing CAS into smaller colleges. In January 2004, the School of Business and Economics split off from CAS, becoming a separate college. However, in a December 2003 referendum, sixty percent of CAS faculty voted against further division, and the issue has not been raised since.

Since Spring 2004, at least one college senate has undergone significant change. Early in his term, the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences formed a "Department Chairs Advisory Committee" in an effort to get feedback from those who have been elected to administer departmental affairs. The CAS Senate perceived this move as threatening its role as CAS policy-maker. The result was the elimination of the advisory committee and addition of all CAS department chairs to the Senate, significantly increasing the size of the Senate.

The charters of the college senates do not explicitly acknowledge that the Congress serves as the voice of the faculty in campus-wide issues. On the other hand, each college is represented on the Congress by an elected representative or representative, and it appears that in their charters and in practice, the college senates are primarily concerned with internal curriculum and policy. The CAFNRM charter was last updated in 1992, before the Congress was formed. (Attachment B.6) The CAS senate charter, last revised in 2004, does not refer to the Congress. (Attachment B.7) The CoBE senate charter, approved in 2004 and revised in 2007, specifies only that “The Senate may make recommendations to the faculty Congress on matters affecting more than one college within the University” [emphasis added]. (Attachment B.8) The CHL senate does not have a written charter, but its focus is on curriculum and other internal academic matters. The CoP does not have a senate, but it has a number of faculty committees that address various matters internal to the college.

By dint of its campus-wide influence and representation, and because it manages the major academic issues of the university—General Education, admissions requirements, conditions for student success, and assessment of

11

student learning—from year to year, the Faculty Congress is already generally recognized the dominant force in faculty governance.

Recommendation:

College senates and the Faculty Congress should continue to work together to delineate clearly distinct areas of responsibility and to resolve such long-standing concerns as college representation on the Congress.

Diversity

Improving Faculty Diversity. The 2004 action letter pointed out that the university lacked a plan for improving the diversity of the faculty. In addition, the site team had pointed out that the EEO/AA officer had no support staff; a permanent clerical position has since been added to the office. (Attachment B.2)

The Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the Faculty and Staff has prepared a report on diversity among faculty and staff and on past and current efforts to enhance diversity and has developed a set of strategies to promote the hiring and retention of under-represented groups. (Attachment B.9) The committee’s report will be reviewed by the faculty Congress and the Chancellor’s Executive Committee in Spring 2008, with implementation to begin shortly thereafter.

The committee observes that a growing body of research indicates that campus diversity has a positive impact on student learning, intellectual motivation, cognitive, academic, and social development. Campus diversity also helps to prepare students as employees working in multi-cultural organizations and as citizens living in a multi-cultural global society. Diverse faculty, staff, and administrators provide students with a broader range of experiences, perspectives, and pedagogy, as well as to a more varied pool of mentors.

Table 1, adapted from the committee report, shows the current gender and ethnic distribution of faculty and administration (E/M, Executive/Manager) in Fall 2007. It shows that across the ranks, UH Hilo’s faculty and administration are more ethnically diverse than are faculty at American universities in general. It also indicates that the University should direct its efforts to improve representation of Native Hawaiians among tenure-track faculty and representation of women in the associate and full professor ranks.

The committee proposes an institutional strategy of opportunity hires—that is, establishing with legislative support a special fund of at least a million dollars and a special pool of 50 permanent positions, to expedite the hiring of highly qualified women and under-represented minorities who become available through the usual recruiting processes or through visiting appointments or distinguished visiting professorships.

Table 1Gender and Ethnic Distribution, UH Hilo Administration and Faculty, Fall 2007

12

13

Employee Type

PctWome

n

PctCaucasi

anPct

AsianPct

NativeHawaiia

n

PctOther

Lecturers 57.8 57.8 39.8 20.5 2.4

Instructors 59.3 77.8 18.5 3.7 3.7

Asst. Prof 57.3 62.7 36 16 1.3

Assoc. Prof 34.7 67.3 24.5 0 8.2

Prof 20 73.3 21.7 .5 5

E/M 44.4 44.5 49.9 11.2 5.6

The committee proposes that the standing Campus Diversity Committee be charged with monitoring gender and race/ethnicity distributions among faculty, staff, and administrators, prioritizing diversity hiring needs, and making recommendations to the chancellor to improve faculty, staff, and administrator diversification at UH Hilo.

The committee also proposes that “UH Hilo facilitate the production of doctoral graduates who will one day become a part of the pool of underrepresented faculty applicants by expanding research and career development opportunities available to UH Hilo students through research assistantships, teaching assistantships, and graduate education.”

Recommendations:

Charge the standing Campus Diversity Committee with monitoring and promoting hiring/retention practices to recruit and retain underrepresented minority faculty and staff.

Continue to encourage faculty mentoring, faculty-student research projects, student internships, and other activities that promote student retention to graduation and aspiration for graduate study and academic careers.

Integrating the Indigenous Culture and Ways of Knowing in the Curriculum. The Commission urged the university to develop a plan to infuse understanding of the indigenous culture and ways of knowing throughout the curriculum. The university does not yet have a formalized plan but is progressing in this area. Since Fall 2003, UH Hilo’s New Faculty Orientation program has devoted at least half a day to educating incoming faculty and staff about Hawai‘i‘s unique culture and history. In particular, we have emphasized the need to incorporate non-western and indigenous worldviews (especially Native Hawaiian perspectives) for a more relevant and balanced educational experience.

14

Since 2002, two programs have made notable progress in this area: Keaholoa STEM and Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center.

In 2002-07, Keaholoa STEM, funded by the National Science Foundation, brought together UH Hilo faculty, Native Hawaiian kūpuna and other cultural experts, so that faculty could gain understanding of and appreciation for Native Hawaiian culture and ways of knowing. Keaholoa STEM program has provided seminars and off-campus retreats for faculty to deepen exposure to Hawaiian culture. As a result, several UH Hilo faculty members have revised curricula, to varying degrees, to reflect awareness of cultural issues and values as well as learning styles associated with indigenous cultures of Hawai‘i and the broader Pacific.

The Keaholoa STEM internship program for Native Hawaiian students has provided opportunities for faculty and students to reciprocally share knowledge about their own science and culture, as they jointly develop research programs that address problems and issues of importance to indigenous communities. Faculty research has been enhanced through the indigenous knowledge gained in this manner.

Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center has added to the enculturation work begun by Keaholoa STEM. Drawing on Title III funds, Kīpuka has worked to increase faculty understanding of the Hawaiian language and of Hawaiian culture. In 2004, Keaholoa began offering Hawaiian language classes to faculty, an effort joined by Kīpuka in Fall 2005. Since then, Kīpuka has offered these classes to both faculty and staff throughout the academic year and in the summer, using Kīpuka Native Hawaiian tutors as instructors.

In Fall 2006, Kīpuka began the Eia Hawai‘i lecture series, presentations on a diversity of issues and concepts important to the indigenous population, for faculty, staff and students to learn about Hawaiian worldviews. Since Fall 2005, the Uluakea Faculty Development Program, also funded through Title III, has trained cross-disciplinary cohorts of faculty to transform their courses by incorporating Hawai‘i and/or Hawaiian perspectives. Participating faculty have come from the disciplines of agriculture, art, biology, business, geography, history, health & physical education, marine science, sociology, political science, psychology, and sociology.

Keaholoa STEM and Kīpuka-Uluakea have established effective models for enriching the curriculum with “important ways of knowing that are unique to the indigenous people” of Hawai‘i and the wider Pacific region.

Recommendation:

Support and institutionalize the Keaholoa and Uluakea models for integrating the indigenous culture into the curriculum and across all colleges.

Educational Effectiveness

15

The Commission observed in 2004 that “efforts to implement assessment initiatives have not yet reached the level of campus-wide engagement” and urged the university to ensure that faculty would understand “that the ultimate purpose of assessment is to improve teaching and learning.”

Over the past four years, there has been modest progress in involving faculty in student learning assessment. The campus Assessment Plan, first developed in 2001, was updated by the Congress Assessment Support Committee and reviewed and approved by the Congress in April 2005. (Attachment B.10) All departments but one have developed statements of student learning outcomes that are included in the college catalog, but most departments are not assessing student performance in those terms and do not require inclusion of such statements in course syllabi, nor is there presently a campus system for collecting and preserving syllabi.

Since 2003 the Office of Academic Affairs has maintained an annual assessment fund of approximately $40,000 that has enabled departments to experiment with different ways of documenting student learning. The Congress Assessment Committee reviews departmental proposals, suggests improvements, and recommends funding to the vice chancellor for academic affairs. (Attachment B.11)

The grant program has succeeded in engaging a number of departments in assessment activities of various kinds. The English Department completed a one-time assessment of student learning in the freshman composition course that promises to lead to some pedagogical changes, and is developing pre- and post-testing for English 209, one of its high-demand writing courses. The History Department is experimenting with electronic portfolios, and the Chemistry Department is using standardized pre- and post-testing. The Mathematics Department has used assessment grants to calibrate its placement testing and to make the now-required placement test available to students year-round in the Math Lab.

Through the assessment grant program, departments have been encouraged to try standardized testing, in particular the ETS Major Field Tests, following the lead of Computer Science and Business, which have used these tests to good effect for many years. Moving beyond standardized testing, the College of Business and Economics is trying out the STEPS portfolio hosting service and training.

Academic program review guidelines require that departments describe their student learning assessment activities and assessment results. Review of the self study reports submitted since the new guidelines went into effect indicates that the assessment requirement has, at the minimum, alerted programs to the concepts of assessment and continuous improvement.

Some programs have used the occasion of the program review to develop their own assessment instruments and an assessment plan. Since 2003, the Communication Department has been refining assessment instruments for its core courses, a challenging task for a small faculty with a large number of

16

majors. In addition to a capstone course (Pols 470S) required of all majors, the Political Science Department has been offering a 64-item multiple-choice questionnaire to introductory and senior-level courses to measure student learning in the program; it continues to refine this instrument. Economics has used the ETS Field Exam for many years now, pre-dating any financial assistance from an assessment fund, and is planning to begin some focused pre-and post-testing in selected GE Econ courses. The department expects to eventually use portfolio assessment for majors.

The Marine Science Department promises to be among the most productive in student learning assessment. Included in their Fall 2007 program review report are a curriculum-learning objectives matrix, rubrics for senior theses and presentations, and a five-year plan to integrate a cumulative exam, embedded assessment, capstone courses organized around student learning objectives and continuous curricular improvement, and feedback about graduate competence from such stakeholders as graduate school advisors and employers.

Review of all available program review reports, however, indicates that most departments might be willing to undertake systematic assessment of student learning but simply do not understand how to conduct assessment systematically and productively. (Copies of program review reports will be available in the site team room.)

Programs accredited by professional agencies have well-developed systems for student learning assessment as required by those agencies: the Nursing program (NLNAC, National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission), the teacher educations programs of CAS and CHL (SATE, State Approval of Teacher Education Programs), and CoBE (AACSB-International, The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business). In its first year of operation, the College of Pharmacy is working rapidly to comply with the assessment expectations of the American Council for Pharmaceutical Education. (Section 6 below describes these efforts.)

It is apparent that the institution as a whole needs to establish a clear understanding of what “student learning assessment” is, what it can accomplish in terms of continuous improvement of teaching and learning, and how programs and the institution can conduct such assessment—and that this understanding must be shared and translated into action by all units.

Renewed efforts to address this need are underway. In Fall 2007, the office of the vice chancellor for academic affairs and the Faculty Congress undertook to engage all CAS and CoBE departments, CHL, CAFNRM, and CoP in reviewing program statements of student learning outcomes, and beginning to plan for student learning assessment. Part of the project is a series of workshops in February 2008 for faculty, staff, and administration, conducted by a national expert in student learning assessment, funded by the vice chancellor for academic affairs. Rather than requiring participation, the project involves paying programs stipends of up to $500 to attend an assessment workshop and complete and submit curriculum maps and preliminary assessment plans. (Attachment B.12)

17

The administration has faithfully supported assessment activities, the Assessment Support Committee provides informal guidance to departments in the preparation of program review self studies, and the institutional researcher works with programs on developing and interpreting data for the self studies. However, neither the committee nor the institutional researcher is able to provide faculty and administration with a broad vision of institution-wide assessment or ongoing expert training or guidance in the development of assessment tools or assessment plans.

Recommendation:

The academic leadership, the Institutional Researcher, and the faculty Congress Assessment Support Committee must continue to work together to ensure that faculty, staff, and administration are trained in assessment policy and practices in accordance with the guidelines of the WASC Evidence Guide and the 2007 WASC “ Rubrics for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assessment Processes.”

4. Other Issues Raised by the 2004 Site Team

General Education

The 2004 WASC site team commended the efforts of the Congress General Education Committee to shape a GE program, noting that “the plan includes systematic assessment, feedback, and program improvement and the structures to achieve them.” (Attachment B.2) Faculty, however, found much to object to in the 2003-2004 proposal, and subsequent GE committees have devoted themselves to developing a plan that would both alleviate faculty objections and provide a meaningful and assessable General Education program. The current GE Committee has taken a new and promising approach to designing a program that could be acceptable to most faculty. (Attachment B.13)

The considerations guiding the GE Committee are: inclusion of learning outcomes and mechanisms for assessment in GE courses and ensuring a rigorous, high-quality education that would be of genuine benefit to students. The Committee has used the results of a Spring 2007 faculty survey on GE, a Fall 2007 faculty survey administered by the Congress Admissions Committee, and its own Fall 2007 faculty survey on possible GE revisions. Following meetings with the college senates in November and December 2007, the Committee will ask faculty to respond via an online survey to proposed revisions in another survey in January 2008. On the basis of WASC recommendations and faculty input, the GE committee has devised a draft plan, which is attached to this narrative. Among the innovations being proposed are the following:

Instead of elaborate hallmarks for each of the basic, area, and other requirements (as was previously proposed and which was unpopular with

18

the faculty), the committee proposes a list of learning goals for the entire General Education program, divided into three phases.

The syllabi of GE courses must include learning goals and requirements that articulate with all of Phase 1 goals, one of the Phase 2 goals, and one of the Phase 3 goals.

Because the faculty surveys indicated concern about critical thinking, writing, and analytical skills, the proposal incorporates more rigorous and sustained work in these three areas than is now the case, and would require that all GE courses incorporate writing or quantitative exercises.

To be accepted for GE, a course would have to satisfy the requirements for its category. Upper-division as well as lower-division courses would be eligible so long as they met the appropriate requirements.

The proposal envisions a General Education Review Committee that would solicit and review applications from departments for courses to be included in the GE program, and audit courses to ensure they continue to comply with the GE requirements. The course assessment process is thus internal to the review and monitoring process.

The committee is also exploring options for a university-level GE examination, which would be taken by students upon completion of their first two years of college to determine whether they have acquired the knowledge and skills offered through GE. The results of the exam would be used to determine how to improve delivery of the GE program.

The committee will work with the assessment consultant during her visit to campus in February 2008 to refine its GE plan. It is possible a new GE plan will be ready for review by the faculty by the end of February, with preparations for implementation to begin as soon as the plan is approved.

Recommendation:

UH Hilo must move expeditiously to revise its General Education program so that it embodies the institution’s expectations for student learning across the curriculum and provides a meaningful and useful foundation for undergraduate and lifelong learning. The institution must also be able to document that students have indeed achieved the skills and knowledge that it claims to deliver through the General Education program.

Retention and Persistence to Graduation

The Data. The site team recommended that the university “undertake a focused effort to increase student retention and graduation rates.” In the years 2001 through 2007, the campus has exerted considerable effort in several specific areas to gain better understanding of the complex campus issues surrounding student retention. These efforts include:

19

Student focus groups discussing issues bearing on retention and student satisfaction

A series of committees examining admissions, retention, and student success

Participation since 2001 in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and campus presentations of NSSE results

Surveys of new admit transfer students, freshmen, graduating seniors, and students who did not return to UH Hilo.

Results of a number of these studies are posted on the institutional research webpage: http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/iro along with a new collection of longitudinal retention and graduation tables which focus on newly admitted transfer and first-time freshman cohorts from Fall 2003 through 2007. (Attachment B.14)

While increasing the number of graduates each academic year between 2003-2004 and 2006-2007 (at 522, 542, 573, and 596 respectively), the campus also demonstrates improved Fall to Fall retention of the total student population (excluding graduates) between the 2003/04 and 2006/07 enrolled cohorts: 63.8%, 66.2%, 67.1%, & 67.5% respectively. The campus has also seen modest but steady improvement in the IPEDS standard measure “6 year graduation rate of 1st time full time degree seeking undergraduates”—from 30.2% of the 1998 cohort, to 30.6% and then 31.5% of the 1999 and 2000 cohorts respectively.

It should be noted that measuring UH Hilo’s retention and graduation rates on the basis of first-time full-time students who graduate from UH Hilo within six years disadvantages this institution by virtue of our specific service population. Typically, many of UH Hilo’s most successful students take part time credit loads while maintaining full time jobs and fulfilling family obligations; others are nontraditional, older adult transfer students who return to college after the passage of a significant number of years with newfound commitment resulting in high intellectual achievement, high rates of graduation, and productive new careers; others begin their studies at UH Hilo with the clear intention to transfer to other campuses in the system to complete programs not available on this campus (e.g. Engineering, Architecture, allied health fields). These are successful students whose experiences demonstrate the strength of UH Hilo’s programs as well as the benefits of a State system in which different campuses purposely provide different opportunities for the state’s population.

The Institution’s Responses. Research at other institutions as well as local surveys and focus groups have shown that the institution can retain more students by taking appropriate action.

First Year Planning Committee. In Summer 2007, the Office of Student Affairs, the Office of Academic Affairs, and the deans of the four colleges with freshman students sent a team of 14 UH Hilo faculty, student affairs professionals, and a dean to the International First Year Experience conference in Waikoloa, Hawai‘i. The First Year team returned to campus prepared to make students’ first year at UH Hilo more inviting, supportive, and

20

intellectually challenging. The first step was to make an inventory of all services and activities already offered to first year students (transfers as well as first-time freshmen). (Attachment B.15)

The chancellor’s First Year Committee, with representatives from the four baccalaureate-degree granting colleges and Student Affairs, is now

drafting a statement of UH Hilo’s commitment to providing students with a welcoming and intellectually challenging first year program that complements our existing programs, such as new Student Orientation and University 101, and

proposing an organizational structure through which current and new First Year activities can be coordinated, delivered, and assessed.

The committee is to submit a report to the chancellor by March 31, 2008, which will then go to the Congress and the Chancellor’s Executive Committee for review and action.

New, Transfer, and Returning Student Orientation. Added to an already fully developed Fall orientation program have been 25 new student sessions in the areas of community, culture, and safety; a revitalized parent program; and community involvement that generates over $4,500 in sponsorships and prizes.

Student Learning and Success Center. In the 2007-2009 Legislative budget, funds were appropriated to open a Student Learning and Success Center that would provide tutoring, placement testing, and learning tools for students in the sciences and in writing. Faculty positions for a Director of Academic Support, a Writing Coordinator, and a Science Coordinator were approved, as were student help funds for the first two years of operation.

Office of Student Affairs. Since Spring 2004, the Office of Student Affairs has continued to enrich and expand its support for entering students, informed by campus research, best practices guidelines, and strategic planning priorities. (Attachment B.16) Among the more notable achievements in easing the entry of new students and facilitating success of all students:

The Advising Center has four professional staff as of Summer 2007 and participates actively in all new student orientation activities, trains departments in advising procedures and the student information system, and advises new students and all students on General Education and graduation requirements.5

The Admissions office has created a new transfer evaluation system allowing transfer students to learn of transfer possibilities within 14 days of being accepted and has appointed a Communications Manager to enhance all forms of communication, especially electronic, with potential UH Hilo students.6

5 The Advising Center home page is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/advising

21

The Financial Aid Office has reduced the default rate on student loans to just 2.8 percent, the lowest in school history and a 40 percent drop in the university’s previous cohort-default rate. At the same time, federal student loan volume at UH Hilo has doubled to about $6 million a year. The office now has a turn-around time of two weeks between application completion and student award letter receipt.

The Housing Office assists students in finding off-campus accommodations and provides shuttle service to off-campus apartment complexes with which the university has agreements, as well as to local shopping centers.

The Records Office has assisted in the establishment and implementation of the UH system’s MyUH Portal system, which is a one-stop “self-service” website enabling students to register for classes, check their grades, send and receive email and announcements, and view their financial account.

Keaholoa STEM Program. A five-year NSF grant has enabled Keaholoa

STEM to support the development of coordinated peer tutoring and supplemental education in all STEM disciplines at UH Hilo, fund renovations to the mathematics and science tutoring lab, which has experienced an increase in usage of over 25% since the improvements were completed in 2006. Keaholoa STEM has offered Summer Intensive Tutorial Mathematics and Chemistry (and Physics) Summer Bridging Course, cultivating study skills and basic knowledge so as to increase the possibility of students’ retention as science majors.

Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center. With Title III funds and matching UH Hilo funds, the Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center was fitted out with offices, a technology/learning center, and perhaps most important for student retention, comfortable and attractive areas for students to study and gather. During the period when Kīpuka has provided tutorial and support services, the graduation and retention rate for Native Hawaiian students has risen to a level above the campus average. In Fall 2005, Kīpuka also developed a comprehensive Native Hawaiian recruitment plan with the goal of increasing Native Hawaiian student enrollment from 16% to 25% by 2008.

Using NSSE to Develop Strategies for Student Engagement. UH Hilo has participated in the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) since Spring 2001. Over these seven years, our standings in almost all categories have been consistently below that of our peer institutions. 7 Acting on the belief that engaged students are students who persist to graduation, the university has made occasional attempts to use NSSE results to motivate faculty to raise the level of academic challenge in courses and to make themselves more

6 Home pages of these student affairs offices are, respectively, http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/admissions/ http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/finaid.phphttp://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/housing/http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/studentaffairs/records/

7 Annual results of our NSSE surveys are posted at the Institution Research website: http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/iro/student_natsurvey.php

22

available to students outside the classroom for mentoring and advising of student organizations.

In Spring 2007, the Faculty Congress vowed to work with faculty to define higher academic expectations and to provide students with the support needed to meet those expectations. In April 2008, the vice chancellor for student affairs and the vice chancellor for academic affairs are bringing to campus a founder of NSSE, with the aim of beginning serious campus discussion on how UH Hilo can become a more engaging institution—one in which students will want to complete their degrees. The Congress will be an important player in designing and implementing any policies or practices that may emerge from that conversation.

Recommendations:

Report retention and graduation rates in a more comprehensive way so as to demonstrate real achievement and success

Coordinate all first-year programs and activities to minimize redundancy and maximize efficiency and assess first-year efforts to ensure continuous improvement

Review NSSE results carefully, prioritize areas for action, and involve all units in the project of engaging more of our students more deeply and actively in campus life and in learning.

Program Review

The 2004 site team observed that the university had just put into effect a new academic program review process that incorporated student learning assessment and external review. The process concludes with a memorandum of agreement between the department and the vice chancellor for academic affairs that specifies actions to be taken in response to the findings of the review.

Academic program review is now solidly established at UH Hilo. The current program review guidelines, approved by the Congress in 2006, are provided in Attachment B.17.CoBE, CHL, CAFNRM, and all CAS departments but two have either completed the review cycle or are in process. (Attachment B.19) External reviewers have contributed to all reviews, and self studies have led to allocation of resources and changes in curriculum. Program review guidelines are under continuous review; graduate program review guidelines are now being developed by the institutional researcher and the Congress Assessment Committee and will be reviewed by the Graduate Council before being submitted to the Faculty Congress. Memoranda of understanding have been agreed upon by the vice chancellor for academic affairs and departments and are posted on the VCAA’s website.

The Office of Student Affairs has also established a smoothly operating program review system. To date, five of the 18 programs within Student Affairs have undergone and completed the program review process (Career Center, Disability Services, Upward Bound, Counseling, and Student Health Services). 

23

Four more programs/units are undergoing the process in 2007-2008 (Kīpuka Native Hawaiian Student Center, Minority Access and Achievement Program, Admissions, and National Student Exchange). The process has resulted in programs incorporating the recommendations that have been made into its strategic plan. (OSA program review materials will be available in the site team room.)

Strategic Plan Performance Indicators

The site team for WASC’s educational effectiveness review commended UH Hilo “for its significant progress in developing a strategic plan with persuasive performance indicators for achieving its educational objectives. The success metrics include specific data gathering and means of reporting for each objective.” However, the team also observed that, while many of the performance indicators devised in connection with the Strategic Plan were assessable, “a number [were] stated in vague terms with measures of success that [were] not definitive.” Target completion dates were also lacking in many cases. (Attachment B.2)

In 2006-2007, a working committee comprised of the institutional researcher, the chair of the Faculty Congress, and two faculty-administrators reviewed the indicators, separating out those for which measures already existed and those for which measures could not be devised and identifying others for which measures could be developed. In Spring 2007, the institutional researcher presented a report on UH Hilo progress in terms of measurable indicators to the Chancellor’s Cabinet and to the Faculty Congress. (Attachment B.20)

Discussion is beginning about preparation of UH Hilo’s next strategic plan. At present, the UH system is in the process of updating its strategic plan. It is anticipated that measurable objectives and associated performance indicators, complete with targets and target dates, will be prominent components of UH Hilo’s next plan. Section 3 discusses strategic planning at the system and campus levels.

5. The Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization

Ke‘elikōlani College’s Ph.D. in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization has attracted international attention as the first doctoral degree in a Native American language and in indigenous language and culture revitalization. Two additional graduate programs (approved at the same time as the Ph.D.), together with the increase in the College’s undergraduate and P-12 laboratory school enrollments, have given rise to resource challenges.

After WASC approval, the Ph.D. program began in the Fall 2006 with an initial cohort of five students—all experienced professionals, each with no less than ten years in Hawaiian or New Zealand Māori language education. The students have completed all coursework, will take their comprehensive examinations in

24

January 2008, and will soon begin their dissertations. The first student is expected to graduate in December 2008.

The Ph.D. has adhered to the program proposal as approved by WASC. The involvement of internationally renown faculty from Western Washington University, the University of Minnesota, the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, and Oxford University have enhanced the program’s research base. In all cases where external faculty have taught, College faculty regularly attended courses, often providing additional instruction. External faculty have committed to serve on dissertation committees.

The Ph.D. program faculty is small enough that informal discussion of strengths, weaknesses, and outcomes of the program have been productive relative to strengthening courses, syllabi, and requirements within the framework of program student learning outcomes.  The initial SLO matrix did not include the area community leadership, development of which is an important feature of successful application of language and culture revitalization to communities.  The program is planning an exit interview with members of the first cohort.  Before a second cohort is admitted, the College will carry out an additional internal evaluation of the program and make appropriate changes. The program coordinator will participate in the Congress assessment project, including the February 2008 program assessment workshop.

Obtaining faculty is the greatest challenge for the College. The Ph.D. is a means to develop faculty using external and internal resources while supporting similar efforts worldwide. Six of the College’s 12 teaching faculty are focused on post-baccalaureate education. Of the six remaining faculty, two are assigned 100% time to the Hawaiian language immersion laboratory school and one, 75% time to the College’s Hale Kuamo‘o Hawaiian Language Center. As part of the process of strengthening the College and drawing new faculty, UH-Hilo is according it greater responsibility for the interdisciplinary undergraduate linguistics program. Three new faculty positions are being advertised in the Spring of 2008, in addition to an educational specialist, a technology specialist, a dean, and an assistant to the dean. Additional resources will be needed to address continued growth. Of the 12 current faculty, only three are assigned 100% time to serve 710 undergraduate students (the total in Fall 2007, 116 of them majors) and only two to serve 340 students in grades preschool through high school at the associated Hawaiian language immersion laboratory school.

The College is satisfied with its representation on the Graduate Council, Research Council, and Congress and is pleased that, during this first cohort, policies relative to the doctoral program are being clarified. However, the long-standing goal of the College to have an internal student services system operated and administered through Hawaiian has not yet been addressed. Furthermore, the College has not yet received support from the University of Hawai‘i system for graduate assistantships or graduate student work space—crucial areas for any graduate program. While the campus has focused on the

25

need to include sensitivity to Native Hawaiians in other colleges, the College’s unique needs have been left largely unaddressed.

Space is a crucial problem for the College, which is currently unable to provide new faculty with their own offices. Progress toward the construction of a College building includes a plan developed with strong faculty input and which has been given high priority for 2008 legislative funding. Because such funding will likely provide only half the estimated total cost of construction, College faculty hope to find matching funds from external sources. The building will play an important role in strengthening all programs of the College, including its graduate programs.

The College of Pharmacy

Following WASC approval of a substantive change proposal, the College of Pharmacy received a site visit by the American Council for Pharmaceutical Education (ACPE), and pre-candidate status was awarded at the Board meeting in June 2007. All of the 75 ACPE standards and numerous guidelines had been met, and the inaugural class of 90 students began instruction in August 2007. In April 2008, the College will undergo a second site visit scheduled by the ACPE for advancement to candidate status. Full accreditation is expected when the first cohort graduates in 2011.

In addition to the dean, the College Pharmacy has recruited two Associate Deans, two Department Chairs, two Assistant Professors, an Instructor, and a Clinical Coordinator. Currently, recruitment is underway for an additional 16 faculty and staff. The first class, of 90 students, has successfully completed its first semester. For enrollment of the second class of 85-90 students, interviews are being conducted, with approximately 250 students selected from an applicant pool comprised of about 600 individuals.

The college’s pressing need for classroom, office, and laboratory space is being addressed by the university. Clinical sites have been arranged for experiential learning at hospitals and pharmacies across the state of Hawai‘i. In addition to the director of experiential learning and the chair of pharmacy practice, one more faculty member will be hired during the next few months to assist with this process. College faculty and administration presently occupy offices in the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry near the main campus. On-campus classrooms and laboratory space are being shared by the other colleges, and study space has been found for students in the Campus Center during afternoon and early evening hours. Additional office space will be provided for the six new faculty scheduled to join the college in the Spring 2008 semester.

New facilities, with office and classroom space, are being constructed above the main UH Hilo campus and will be available for use by late Fall 2008 or early Spring 2009. In addition to legislative funding, the cost of CoP facilities will be covered by surplus tuition revenues and gifts.

26

Campus support services have also been enhanced. A student services office is located on the main campus. Additional staff have been added to the Mookini Library who will work the College, and the Library collection has been greatly expanded to include pharmacy resources. The University of Hawai‘i Foundation has assigned a development officer to procure gifts for the College.

Faculty governance at CoP is developing expeditiously. CoP sends a representative to the UH Hilo Faculty Congress and a representative to the Graduate Council. The following college committees have been formed and have been very active: assessment, curriculum, admissions, and the student promotion and graduation committee. Eventually there will be committees on by-laws, awards, and tenure and promotion review. Committees will develop and propose policies to the entire faculty for ratification.

The college Curriculum Committee has revised the preliminary curriculum, developed for the purposes of achieving pre-candidacy status with ACPE and WASC. The proposed new curriculum has been presented to the faculty and was approved for implementation. The curriculum is organized around four themes or strands: basic science, clinical science, social and administrative science, and experiential learning in clinical settings. At the core of the curriculum are courses in pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pathophysiology, and therapeutics. These core courses will be taught in an integrated fashion, comprising a four semester sequence. (Attachment B.21)

The college Assessment Committee, chaired by a faculty member with extensive experience in all areas of assessment including student learning assessment, has been at work since May 2007. A proposed set of assessment activities and a detailed list of program learning objectives have been presented to the faculty and approved. (Attachments B.22 and B.23)Consistent with ACPE expectations, all CoP syllabi include course learning objectives formulated in terms of program objectives. Experienced faculty members are accustomed to assessment, and the faculty members coming from industry and research can be expected to learn these practices as they adapt to their other academic responsibilities.

7. Other Issues Facing the Institution

Graduate Council and Graduate Programs

UH Hilo offers master’s degree programs in China-U.S. Relations (MA), Counseling Psychology (MA), Education (MEd), Hawaiian Language and Literature (MA), and Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Science (MS). It also offers the PhD in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization and the Doctor of Pharmacy degree. The doctoral programs are described in sections 5 and 6 above.

Table 2 displays the number of graduates in the master’s degree programs as of May 2007; the doctoral programs are too new to have graduated students. In Fall 2007, the doctoral program in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and

27

Culture Revitalization currently has five enrolled students and is considering admission of a second cohort in Fall 2008. The Doctor of Pharmacy program has 90 students in its first cohort and will admit a similar number in its second cohort in Fall 2008.

Table 2. Number of Graduates per Year in Master’s Degree Programs

Degree Title 2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

MA Hawaiian Language and Literature

MEd EducationMS Tropical

Conservation Biology and Environmental Sci.

MA Counseling Psychology

MA China-US Relations

1

--

-

1

15-

--

2

11-

--

-

3-

--

5

14-

-4

-

-6

88

The UH Hilo Graduate Council, established in 2003, consists of appointed representatives of graduate programs at UH Hilo, the graduate student association, and the Admissions Office, a Faculty Congress liaison, the university registrar, and the coordinator of research and graduate education. During the current developmental period, when just six graduate programs exist at UH Hilo, the Graduate Council also has members who are faculty representing the academic units of the university. 8

Since 2004, the council has established general policies for graduate education, specific requirements for the master's degree, and standing committees on courses, programs, and admissions. More recently, the council has established policies for the doctoral degree, focusing on the PhD. Policies for the professional doctorate in pharmacy will be considered next. The policies and requirements for graduate programs are listed in the UH Hilo Catalog in a section labeled "Graduate Catalog." (Attachment A.4)

The graduate programs are beginning to formulate program-level student learning objectives and, in interviews conducted in Fall 2007 in connection with the WASC progress report, all coordinators will attend the assessment workshops scheduled for February 2008. The graduate program that is most advanced in this area is the College of Pharmacy, which during its first year of operation is developing learning outcomes and a well-articulated assessment plan to meet the expectations of the American Council for Pharmaceutical

8 The Graduate Programs webpage is at http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/academics/graduate/

28

Education and the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (see Section 6 above).

Graduate programs must submit reports to the Board of Regents for review within five years after they have enrolled their first students; the Board awards permanent status to programs that demonstrate satisfactory progress. Once made permanent, the graduate programs are integrated into the university’s program review schedule. The Board conferred permanent status on the MA in Hawaiian Language and Literature in 2002 and on the Master of Education program in 2006.

Two graduate programs, the China-US Relations MA and the Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Sciences MS are currently being reviewed by the UH Hilo Graduate Council, with their report to be forwarded to appropriate deans and then to the vice chancellor for academic affairs. The China-US Relations program is undergoing special review by the university because of a variety of issues, ranging from low enrollment to overuse of special topics courses to problems evaluating foreign transcripts before program admission. In response, the Graduate Council last fall approved a procedure to use professional services for interpretation of undergraduate transcripts from non-US institutions, and the China-US relations program submitted requests for three new courses that include the content of courses formerly offered under the special topics rubric.

During 2007-08, the Graduate Council is refining a draft recommendation on faculty workload related to graduate education and expects to present it to the vice chancellor for academic affairs in Spring 2008. There has been some concern that faculty involved in graduate education are becoming overwhelmed by their workload, including service on graduate committees. (The normal teaching load at UH Hilo was designed for undergraduate education.) Other concerns that the Council has discussed but has not resolved: UH Hilo needs resources for graduate assistantships and adequate space for graduate student offices and workrooms.

A core concern for graduate education is that no formal graduate office is available on campus. The coordinator of research and graduate education is a half-time faculty position with no staff.

In January 2008, a temporary vice chancellor for research will join UH Hilo for up to two years. The position is funded by the National Science Foundation to support research activity and development on campus. (Attachment B.4) The coordinator of research and graduate education will report to this vice chancellor, and a temporary office for graduate studies is being established. Admissions and registration are handled by individuals whose primary position is in undergraduate education and who assist graduate programs on a part-time basis.

UH Hilo will continue to add graduate programs. Even now, with just six graduate programs, a dedicated administrative position is needed, along with clerical staff, and one or more educational specialists in admissions and

29

registration who are trained in the specific issues of graduate education. The university has submitted "program change requests" to the system office to establish these positions, but the requests have not been accorded a high enough priority to obtain funding.

Recommendations:

Establish a Graduate Office after an evaluation of staffing requirements Develop a strategic plan for the implementation of new graduate

education programs (MS or PhD) in high-demand fields such as pharmaceutical sciences.

Continue to build research infrastructure, including library collections, so faculty can realize their full potential as scholars.

Management of Policies and Documents

The primary policies affecting the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo are Board of Regent bylaws Title 20 of the Hawai‘i Revised Statutes, and the University of Hawai‘i Administrative Rules. These are readily available on the UH system website.9 The Faculty Handbook, updated annually, is a comprehensive reference for many academic practices and policies (Attachment B.24), and many UH Hilo policies and documents are available on the University’s website and in college and division offices. However, many are not.

The campus has long recognized that some academic policies exist in practice but have not been committed to writing so that they can be readily consulted and adhered to. Other rules and policies are difficult to find or are out of date. There is no unified webpage for policies at the college level, nor are complete records of past Congress or senate actions readily available. In addition, there is no list of all committees at UH Hilo. Such a list should include committee charges, membership, and links to documents produced by the committees.

A remedy for some of these problems is on its way. The library’s University Archives, previously limited to storing print copies of university documents, is establishing an online presence. Over the years, the online archive will resolve the problem of lack of access to UH Hilo’s academic and administrative policies and other important documentation. University Archives will collect them in hard copy and electronic formats. Designated university officers and representatives will be able to post documents to the website, which will be managed by the head of the Hawaiian Collection. Ideally, however, such a compilation should be maintained by a full-time archivist, who would acquire content in a proactive and systematic way, assure overall compliance, apply archival protocols, and facilitate access. It is expected that the online archive will be ready to receive documents beginning in Summer 2008. (Attachment B.25)

Recommendations:9 At http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/bor/policy/index.html and http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/bor/adminrules/index.html

30

Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a position for a full-time archivist trained in the orderly acquisition and management of digital materials.

Develop a comprehensive and logically organized institutional manual of policy and procedures, to be made available in print form and online and annually updated.

Develop a webpage where policies and procedures are made available in an orderly and easily accessible form.

8. Preparing for the Next Cycle of Review

Looking toward the beginning of the next accreditation review cycle, with the proposal for the self study due in 2010, we see a number of scheduled projects that will certainly reshape the institution in important ways—and we can be sure that unexpected events will also have their effects.

A new campus strategic plan will need to be developed soon. The UH system is already updating the current 2002-2010 plan and extending it to 2015, and UH Hilo will need to envision and plan its own future in tandem with the system plan—without being dominated by it. As pointed out in section 3, it is essential that representatives of all campus constituencies participate in the development of the system and campus strategic plans.

Capacity issues will continue to demand sustained focus. As section 3 makes clear, UH Hilo must continue to advocate formula funding and more rational budget processes tied to strategic planning on campus and from the UH system, so that the institution can continue to grow while providing quality education to its diverse student population. And we must establish a solid infrastructure and adequate support for graduate students and faculty.

While these and other changes unfold, the institution will need to devote more resources to developing a culture of evidence and accountability and to functioning as an institution that places student learning at the center of all activities. Cooperation between the Faculty Congress and the administration, and between the Congress and colleges and college senates is essential to the success of these projects.

9. Conclusion

How Have Our Responses to WASC’s Challenges Affected the Institution?

The accreditation steering committee was reconstituted in Spring 2007 to prepare for the March 2008 special visit from WASC and to compose the special visit report. The committee soon realized that efforts had been made regarding the recommendations of the May 2004 site team and the four issues raised in

31

the Commission’s June 2004 action letter. The institution has indeed been moving forward in most areas.

These projects are continuing: making the campus budget process more open and participatory, expanding research activity and increasing research dollars, bringing in more donations and growing the university’s small endowment, helping faculty to understand the cultures and people of Hawai‘i, involving more departments in student learning assessment, designing a more meaningful and assessable General Education program, improving the new program review process, making our educational offerings more engaging and more challenging, and reshaping services to students so that they match student needs more closely. Faculty governance appears to be evolving towards a clear division of responsibilities between the Congress and the college senates.

The committee has concluded that the WASC recommendations and expressions of concern have given definition to the institution’s own sense of where it should be going and what it should be doing for its faculty, its students, and the community.

Major Recommendations

The following recommendations are highlighted here because they directly address the Commission’s concerns as expressed in the 2004 site team report and Commission action letter. Other recommendations in the report address issues that the University should also work to resolve over the coming years.

Continue discussions with the UH System regarding the budget process and resources to support enrollment and program growth, which are badly needed for Hawaii’s future, workforce, human capital, and economic development

Seek to establish the position of vice chancellor for research to support both research proposals and institution improvement grants

Faculty as well as administration must participate actively in the reshaping of the UH system strategic plan, which include strategic priorities and performance measures that will affect system allocations to the campus and with which our own strategic planning must be aligned

Encourage wider community interest and involvement in the community fundraising mission through the 2007-2008 60th Anniversary Celebration and subsequent development activities.

College senates and the Faculty Congress should continue to work together to delineate clearly distinct areas of responsibility and to resolve such long-standing concerns as college representation on the Congress

32

Charge the standing Campus Diversity Committee with monitoring and promoting hiring/retention practices to recruit and retain underrepresented minority faculty and staff

Support and institutionalize the Keaholoa and Uluakea models for integrating the indigenous culture into the curriculum and across all colleges

The academic leadership, the Institutional Researcher, and the faculty Congress Assessment Support Committee must continue to work together to ensure that faculty, staff, and administration are trained in assessment policy and practices in accordance with the guidelines of the WASC Evidence Guide and the 2007 WASC “ Rubrics for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assessment Processes.”

UH Hilo must move expeditiously to revise its General Education program so that it embodies the institution’s expectations for student learning across the curriculum and provides a meaningful and useful foundation for undergraduate and lifelong learning. The institution must also be able to document that students have indeed achieved the skills and knowledge that it claims to deliver through the General Education program.

Review NSSE results carefully, prioritize areas for action, and involve all units in the project of engaging more of our students more deeply and actively in campus life and in learning.

Report retention and graduation rates in a more comprehensive way so as to demonstrate real achievement and success

Coordinate all first-year programs and activities to minimize redundancy and maximize efficiency and assess first-year efforts to ensure continuous improvement.

33

A. Required Attachments in Print and on CD

1. Organization Chart Showing Major Units2. Required Data Displays3. Budget for FY 20084. 2007 Annual Report to the Commission5. 2007-08 University Catalog

Required Attachments on CD 6. Most Recent Financial Statement and Audit7. Complete UH Hilo Organizational Chart

B. Supporting Materials on CD

1. Commission Action Letter to UH Hilo, June 20042. Site Team Report on UH Hilo, May 20043. UH system draft “Outcomes and Measures 2008-2015” January 20084. NSF Letter regarding Vice chancellor for Research Position5. Faculty Congress Charter6. CAFRM Senate Charter7. CAS Senate Charter 8. CoBE Senate Charter9. Report of the Chancellor’s Committee on the Diversification of the

Faculty and Staff10. UH Hilo Assessment Plan11. 2006-2007 Assessment Projects Funded by VCAA12. 2007-2008 Congress-VCAA Assessment Project13. GE Proposal 2007-200814. Retention Tables15. Inventory of Current First Year Activities16. Office of Student Affairs Selected Accomplishments 2000-200717. Program Review Guidelines 2006-200718. Program Review: External Review19. Program Review Schedule 2002-200820. UH Hilo Update on Strategic Plan Performance Indicators Spring 200721. CoP Revised Curriculum22. CoP Planned Assessment Activities23. CoP Student Learning Outcomes24. 2007-2008 Faculty Handbook25.UH Hilo Library Policy on Archiving

34